I write and speak about technology's impact on business and life in books, for Forbes and occasionally for business. I'm author of five books including Age of Context and Naked Conversations and am currently researching a book with the working title of The We Economy: How Technology Gives Everyone a Better Shot. Pitch me by email: ShelIsrael1@gmail.com.

Does Zuckerberg's Hoodie Matter?

I am no fan of Mark Zuckerberg and I think Facebook’s IPO prospectus has some very goofy numbers in it. Personally, I think Facebook stock is a great short-term bet, but I do worry about it as a long-term investment.

Zuckerberg and the imminent IPO are in the crosshairs of some of the largest issues impacting people, technology, privacy and information sharing. So in this week before one of the largest IPO’s in history takes place, I was disappointed to see that focus of investor conversation went onto fashion.

When the most successful entrepreneur of his generation showed up on Wall Street wearing his trademark hoodie and sneakers, many investors cringed. Rather than ponder whether the largest social network could figure out how to derive adequate revenues from mobile platforms, they debated his wardrobe selection. Michael Pachter, a research analyst for Wedbush Securities in Los Angeles was interviewed saying that Zuck’s hoodie was “a mark of immaturity.”

He suggested the founder step aside, presumably in favor of a better-coiffed CEO, who understands the importance of Brioni suits in producing returns for investors. I thought it a nice special touch that in his video interview his necktie appeared just a tad off to the right.

I too have suggested that Zuckerberg could not grow into the job as rapidly as he would need to. I once wrote an open letter suggesting he step down . But my concerns are what’s under his hood, not the hood itself.

Perhaps Zuckerberg did mean a certain disrespect, and if so, I do not blame him and I doubt it will hurt Facebook’s stock performance. Wall Street is well-documented in helping extremely well-dressed slime-balls make billions by misleading Main Street investors to benefit institutional cronies.

The suit itself has become the symbol of white collar shysters and people more interested in prioritizing deals over people and ethics.

The suit is also a two-way cultural issue. Entrepreneurs are supposed to put them on when they go to New York and Washington DC and lawyers, investment bankers and politicians are advised to take them off when they visit Silicon Valley. It’s been that way for many years.

The apparel gap is not new. When young Bill Gates was about to take Microsoft public, a PR consultant was said to have nearly wrestled him to the ground to ditch his patented floppy sweater for a well-tailored suit. For a while, Steve Jobs made the same concessions but after his company made so many people rich, he went back to his black mock turtlenecks.

As far as Pachter’s immaturity charge goes, Zuckerberg is 27. Demonstrations of it from young entrepreneurs is a time-proven financial asset demonstrated by a long parade of young leaders who have made investors hundreds of billions of dollars over the years.

You often find immaturity in those who are willing to dream dreams and pay the price to make them come true. It is often publicly displayed in form of impatience, tenacity and occasional temper tantrums. Those qualities have been demonstrated by nearly all of the most successful entrepreneurs.

Sloppily dressed entrepreneurs build things. Some of them have last value and in some ways change the world, sometimes for the worst and often for the better. On Wall Street they don’t build anything. They just make deals.

I have spent no time inside Mark Zuckerberg’s brain. But I think his decision to underdress for his grand debut was not made casually. I think he was telling everyone that he was playing more for everyday, casually dressed people than for the institutional cliques that Wall Street generally represents.

Perhaps Zuckerberg was also playing to investors of a younger generation. Many of that generation is still fond of suits, but perhaps they are less judgmental of smart people who choose not to wear them.

Personally, I continue to wonder if Zuckerberg will grow into the sort of CEO that Jobs or Gates emerged into. But hoodies and sneakers are not the issues that will determine the outcome. And if Wall Street doesn’t like Zuckerberg, I don’t think it will impact stock performance nearly as much as Wall Street thinks it will.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

I also think Zuckerberg has a serious mental complex where his hoody is his security. I saw him in an interview where the interviewer asked him to take his hoody off because it was hot and he was sweating. He about had a breakdown when he was asked to take it off.

here’s my thought…”who cares?” the guys worth more than most of us who read this site… I’m more inclined to ask “is facebook REALLY worth 96billion? or are we over inflating it like we did in the 90′s with google and amazon and heading for yet another economic disaster?”…cause the answer is a resounding yes.

The utter inanity and lack of imagination among Wall Street drones belies all their contentions about their supposed superior ability to deal with marketing and public interest.

To label a hoodie as immature reflects the abject immaturity of the observer not the fashion maven. Evidently business bees do not have the creativity and verve to venture from the hive without their pathetic, cookie cutter uniforms.